Townsend v. State

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Townsend v. State

105 S.E. 377, 26 Ga. App. 82, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 287

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedDecember 16, 1920

Docket11891

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 105 S.E. 377 (Townsend v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Townsend v. State, 105 S.E. 377, 26 Ga. App. 82, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 287 (Ga. Ct. App. 1920).

Pincite

Opinion

Bloodworth, J.

The motion for a new trial in this case contained only the usual general grounds. “.While the evidence is rather weak, this court cannot say, as a matter of law, that the verdict is without evidence to support it. The verdict having been approved by the trial judge, under the repeated and uniform rulings of this court and of the -Supreme Court a reviewing court is powerless to interfere. When the verdict is' apparently decidedly against the weight of evidence, the trial judge has a wide discretion as to granting or- refusing a new trial; but whenever there is any evidence, however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court. Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App. 510 (94 S. E. 618), and cit. ” Page v. State, 23 Ga. App. 548 (4) (99 S. E. 55).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bloodworth, J.

The motion for a new trial in this case contained only the usual general grounds. “.While the evidence is rather weak, this court cannot say, as a matter of law, that the verdict is without evidence to support it. The verdict having been approved by the trial judge, under the repeated and uniform rulings of this court and of the -Supreme Court a reviewing court is powerless to interfere. When the verdict is' apparently decidedly against the weight of evidence, the trial judge has a wide discretion as to granting or- refusing a new trial; but whenever there is any evidence, however slight, to support a verdict which has been approved by the trial judge, this court is absolutely without authority to control the judgment of the trial court. Bradham v. State, 21 Ga. App. 510 (94 S. E. 618), and cit. ” Page v. State, 23 Ga. App. 548 (4) (99 S. E. 55).

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and Luke, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 S.E. 377, 26 Ga. App. 82, 1920 Ga. App. LEXIS 287, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/townsend-v-state-gactapp-1920.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack